London’s social mobility successes are partly explained by the proximity of a wide range of universities.
Photograph: Alamy Stock Photo

With more than 45% of school leavers now attending university it would be easy to assume that we have a system that is meeting need and providing equity of opportunity for students of equal ability. Yet earlier in February figures were published showing that attempts to widen participation have stalled.

Part of the problem lies in how uneven university participation is across the UK. A recent Social Mobility Commission report [pdf] illustrated the different outcomes among pupils eligible for free school meals depending on where they live.

For our region, the east of England, the university participation rate for students entitled to free school meals at 15, across our local authorities, is an average of 16% – the participation rate for all students is 34%.

'A policy change away from collapse': universities' fears for 2018

Read more

Compare this to the London local authorities, which are 38% and 44% respectively. In the east of England, only one local authority, Luton, comes close to matching these participation rates for students on free school meals with the average level, whereas in London there are eight local authorities where the participation rates are higher in the free school meal cohort than overall.

The east of England is economically thriving in many areas, yet figures for the local authorities around Cambridge show that university participation among students eligible for free school meals at 15 is no greater than the national average.

If you make the assumption that innate academic ability is distributed evenly across our population – any other is untenable – then we have an education system that is systematically disadvantaging many students outside of London.

Of the Social Mobility Commission’s top 20 “hotspots” for best-performing local authorities, 17 are in London. Why are these figures so different from the rest of the country?

Some of this will be explained by the improvements in school and college education in the capital, some by the employment market and the very visible opportunities in London, and some by the proximity of a wide range of universities.

London pupils see opportunities – whether for study or careers – on their doorstep. For many parts of the east of England, institutions such as my own have to take these opportunities to the pupils. Transport is also likely to be a factor. Many small towns and villages in the Fens, for example, have poor transport links, leaving young people isolated, something that isn’t the case in London.

The differences are so stark that it is difficult to attribute them to a small number of reasons without better evidence. What the London figures demonstrate unequivocally though is that it is possible to achieve far more equitable university participation than the rest of the country has managed.

London pupils see opportunities – whether for study or careers – on their doorstep

The east of England has the dubious honour of being home to a quarter of the Department for Education’s new opportunity areas. However, it is sometimes difficult to see the additional funding available for Fenland and east Cambridgeshire, Ipswich and Norwich as little more than a sticking plaster.

What are we as a university doing about this? The first thing is to understand the data and look at how we can use it to direct our investment in widening participation. Alongside this we must use our role as “critic and conscience” to highlight these issues as widely as possibly.

We are working in Essex with a wide group of cross-sector leaders to identify how we can best introduce whole-of-system change that will improve educational outcomes, and in Cambridge to support the wider educational system. These sit alongside some specific projects, such as work with IntoUniversity to raise aspirations and support schools in delivering Stem education.

Looking at the cohort of students who receive free school meals is one marker of the levels of inequality in our educational system, but the figures are so striking that they cannot be ignored.

It is unacceptable that these differences can be allowed to continue in our society. Yet worrying new figures showing increasing rates of child poverty across the country, alongside the soaring cost of living, indicate that inequality of wealth and opportunities will continue, even within small geographic areas.

We must not allow the recent departures of Alan Milburn and colleagues from the Social Mobility Commission, or Justine Greening from her role as education secretary so soon after the launch of her social mobility plan [pdf], to slow progress in this area.

Universities cannot solve this alone but it is vital that we play a pivotal role in the cross-sectoral, whole-of-system change that is required. The government must start by pledging serious funds to tackle this crisis, as well as rebooting the Social Mobility Commission – this time giving it some actual power.